tv [untitled] March 6, 2011 9:30am-10:00am PST
i have hit a real concerns. first is local hiring. with the essential -- the central subway project being of great interest to our communities, this is people of our community to work on the project and second is the overall job opportunity. one other opportunities will be available to the communities? such as agents, training operators. will there be any additional training for the upcoming jobs? thank you. director nolan: next speaker. >> good afternoon. bright line defense projects, here also to speak with respect to the central subway project, which we are all willie excited about, that it is getting to where it is going forward, and also the city's new mandatory
local hiring law for construction, which applies to construction that is going to elevate opportunities for communities to work on these exciting projects. i kind of just wanted to see if we could request an update for the status of central subway. i know there were some publications that the first leg of the project, called the guy with a tunnel, would be put out for bid at the end of february. if it has not gone out -- if it has, then that is exciting, but if it has not, i would put to the board here the possibility of maybe even waiting an extra couple of weeks. on march 25, the city's new local hiring law kicks in, and we might be able to take advantage of that with the guideway tunnel. a couple of things to point out, if we get to that kind of update, and even if it has gone up to date, what is the plan for doing local hiring? because there is a lot of people really excited about this. one thing to just highlight, and i think a lot of us will be engaging the mta more about this, was there is the idea of
that sense about 50% of the funding was federal for central subway, we not be -- we might not be able to do local hiring. that is changing now. in d.c., we have the some of the federal transportation dollars are starting to use the hud affordable housing local hiring requirements on transportation. that is really exciting. not only that, but on this first leg, it is the biggest of central subway. approximately 20% of it is city, which is local, which we can apply the new local hiring ordinates to. really exciting. i just wanted to see if we can get an update. where is that, if it has gone out to bid, what we think about waiting to use this new local hiring law, and one way or the other, what is our plan to connect local residents? >> i am very excited about the central subway as well, and i'm thrilled about the new local
hiring law. i would like to ask at this time, do we have any updates for the first phase of the project that we can provide either the speakers today and the public on if there are any plans? >> we can take a look at the schedule in terms of the next full board meeting, i guess, in march -- i mean in april. we can give you a briefing on the project and then local hiring as well as local contracting, where we stand as an agency. >> okay, next speaker please. >> greetings. in an incident that resembled one that happened here in san francisco not long ago, 35 people were recently heard in san diego. there's no sign that the proper conclusion will be drawn to improve cabdriver work conditions.
do you think it would affect your job performance to know that there's always a possibility that someone next to you would barf in the chair next to you and that that would cost the income? one cat had to be sold to regulations against mill. the company quietly absorb the $20,000 loss. you have not officer standing by in case we speak out of turn. we have people barfing. \ we also deal with these. we pay for our own prosecution, which is frequently quintuple bill. you also make us pay for transit competition, but not all of us pay equally, and this is my chief point. the poorest cabdrivers pay the most. you are beating up on the little guys, and i'm extremely happy to know that your policies cost the drivers without medallions, to pay for mta service to non-cap
customers. you are even allowing loans would balloon payments. you do this by stealing from the antrum moneys paid out by drivers without medallions after a medallion has been continued and before it has been continued. by definition, it is drivers without medallions who are paying that money, and it is approaching $1 million so far. your policy is stridently unfair and should be changed. go pick on someone your own size. director nolan: thank you. next speaker. good afternoon. >> herbert wiener, former member of the mta fan club. you know how muni gets more bang for the buck? we get the bank, you get two bucks -- we get the bang, you
get two bucks. when i had written this coaches, there has been a strange odor that the drivers have been subjected to, and it could be asbestos -- i did not know what it is, but it should be addressed. i think it is a safety concern. next, i want to describe the very negative experience i had. on saturday night at 11:50, narrowly missed the muni 1 california bus. i had to wait 45 minutes for the bus. fortunately, it was warm weather, but it was a lousy experience in the dead of night. i do not know if this board can do anything about it. i do not know if they can understand the inconvenience i went through. i think the only way this board will understand and do anything about it is if the same thing
happens to them. i think that is the bottom-line. in respect to this pending investigation regarding safety concerns, hopefully, it does not result in that $20,000 a day fine, but whatever the result of that, it should not be taken out of the hides of riders and the public. the costs should be made up internally. if necessary, you should have to sac managers, not replace them, and use the money from their salaries to pay that fine. it should not be taken out of our hides. thank you. >> [reading names] director nolan: good afternoon. >> good afternoon, directors. for many years, i have written to you and her reign you about ways to raise revenue.
i want to change tax a little bit and consider ways to improve service and save money -- i want to change tacks a little bit. we could change 1% of average running time, you are saving $7 million or $8 million a year, but that is something to work at because many times, you could save much more. the line i use most -- not the most, but the 28, something i'm very familiar with. i'm also prompted by back in november, there was an article talking about reducing the number of stops. i know that reducing the number of stocks is something that no one wants to do. people will get all upset, but i submit to you that north of the park, people will -- there's two blocks between stops. south of the park, there is one block. same people. do they walk better north of the park? no, the reason i would submit is that north of the park, when a
bus stops, it stops in a traffic lane. it may be transit first, but it is not good for cars, so we have half as many stops. i'm submitting that we did the same thing south of the park, and you would have less stops, and there, you would have to build bus will still allow the drivers to park right there. so you have half as many stops, you are not impacting cars as much. we know from the tests that more people board more quickly when you have less stops. you have more people waiting to board more quickly. so this is something back you should be doing. the other thing is that the combination of fewer stops and possibles are factors that help you reach a threshold of where you can save money. i'm going to have a come back to finish this. i have sent you a copy.
i hope you read it. thank you very much. director nolan: we are always happy to see you month after month. >> just one comment on that -- we have not forgotten about the tep. >> the task force is being reassembled to do an update on the status of the tep and what are the next steps. we recently completed the implementation study of a plan that will help us march through all of the improvements. >> we have not forgotten the tep, and that is still something we are very interested in. >> indeed, two weeks ago, we had a full board discussion about these very issues. you are welcome to come back every month, but you do not need to. director nolan: ok, next speaker please. >> [reading names]
and these are the last of the speakers for this section of the agenda. >> good afternoon. i see a little common topic during public comment about older, and something really stinks here. why were we put under sonali bose, which is finance, compared to deborah johnson, which is administration? to me, it shows we are a cash cow. we are financed to this organization. it is about finance, how we finance muni is coming out of the cab drivers hides. i invite president nolan, who runs a humanitarian organization, probably one of the best in the country -- i invite you to come to the next meeting in two weeks, in 13 days so you get to hear what is going on and learn the problems of the taxi industry. you do not want to hear it here. you do not want to bring it up.
you do not want to have discussions. it is all about you just taking money out of our hides. the next issue is we have two companies, one nationwide and one small one, operating illegally as taxicabs, and i have done some research on the internet, and i asked you to get your city attorney's office involved to write letters threatening them with lawsuits or finds. you have the puc here on friday. have them involved in why they are operating illegally, taking money from cabdrivers. while we sit down and talk about it, rather than allowing less than two minutes? i appreciate your concern about wanting to use drivers as a cash cow, but taking away money from cabdrivers being able to pay you. also, you promised us a meter increase. we should do it by july 1, when the new budget takes place. because drivers need to feed their kids and their wives and themselves as well, and
everything has gone up, including gas, so i urge you to please do it. and also, there is blood on your hands because the police are not reporting to us the crimes as in progress. thank you. director nolan: thank you. next speaker please. good afternoon, mr. snyder. >> good afternoon. co-founder of utw for informational purposes. also, former chicago legal aid adviser. i want to back up the last point about security. i have been in contact with that the director hiyashi and with lieutenant ed de carlo.
and my help chordate information so that the drivers know or we get to them in a timely fashion what is happening, who is being attacked, what we can do about it and all that. i wish i could tell you i knew what was going on. people are really lost. any given day, i never know who has what information. it is strange how you hear about these things, but the one thing is that the people who should know do not know, and they are not coordinated, and we need your help on it. i also have a secondary. , and i wonder if this is an appropriate point -- director nolan: we will be there shortly. >> 10.3 has been removed. >> it the way it occurs to me is the the present operations are
workable, and there ought to be some evidence -- like a preponderant of evidence to indicate why it needs some major change. you are going to be recirculating the buses and so forth. that is a major route for people, by the way, needing to go to ucsf, to continue on, and so forth. it seems to me that this is an accommodation to the brie and vino crowd. before you do that, i would like to see what the preponderant of evidence is why it needs change, and is there any evidence of if you build tunnels to keep the present one way in effect, because you can only pair back on public driving and transportation so much in order to accommodate -- well, i do not know. i guess you could say --
director nolan: we will give you a little more time to speak. >> i think you get the point. >> the last person who has turned in as speaker card under this section. >> good afternoon, mr. chairman, board of directors. i'm going to speak about the employee park, even though it should be about one priority, but it is important that you understand what this local is going through, especially the employee parking. february 18, we met with john haley, the operating chief officer, and we brought some questions, some vital questions that have not been answered yet. one of the questions that arises is my employees, your employees, members do not have a clue, not
a clue whatsoever what deregulation, what part controls, the segment of what benefits were introduced in this. the other point that has been asked, some of the questions, how you are going to -- for example, with members be guaranteed a parking space after purchasing it heard that? what employees be able to park rte. a city? you pay for a parking permit, what is the parking area? how will they ensure that employees are being treated equally in reference to parking permits? will the time restrictions -- this one is very important -- will the time restrictions in some areas be lifted? as you know, transit operators have very diverse schedules, which eliminates the option of taking public transportation to work, which under your transit
first policy,, but we are 24/7, and you know that, so we are the ones to deliver the service up there, and some of these issues, some of these logistics, and i wish one of you would direct someone to meet and confer with us and finish this process. director nolan: thank you. anyone else could it to address the board and the public comment? seeing none. and i have a couple of things. mr. planthold's comment about the clipper card -- >> we will give you an update because we have been watching the performance of those readers. more recently, we have seen an improvement, but we will check and get that back to you in the form of a memo. director nolan: the concern mr. schneider has raised a number of times about taxi security.
i'm not sure where we are with that. i think we were looking into it. i hope we are, anyway. so we can get some kind of report about that. seems to me is an important issue. ok. >> mr. chairman, you do have several items that have been severed from the agenda. as previously stated, item 10.3 has been removed from the consent calendar and from today's agenda. in addition, members of the public have asked that item 10.2x regarding residential permit parking be severed, and also, 10.9 regarding some penalties for motor vehicles for hire the seven and considered separately. those are the only requests we have received unless a member of the board wishes to have an additional item severed. director nolan: and 10.1, does
that not have to come back in a closed session? >> it would have to be noticed for a future board meeting. >> it is not a question about any single particular item. it is a question in the aggregate. >> they are confidential matters and require discussion in a closed session. >> i withdraw my request. director nolan: ok. do you want to call the consent calendar with the items? >> 10.9, with regards to the amendments of the transportation co regarding motor vehicles for hire, and 10.3, which was removed from the agenda completely, and 10.2 with regard to 21st street parking. with that, the remaining items are before you for your consideration. >> is there a motion on the remaining items of the consent calendar? >> so move. director nolan: further
discussion? all in favor? opposed? >> item 10.2x. you have several members of the public who wish to address you. we will start with nancy fleischer. is ms. fleischer here? director nolan: i guess not. >> ok, david pennybaker. mrs. fleischer. >> fleischman. only the telephone people get that name right. thank you for this opportunity
to talk to you. i have been worried about how long i can say in my house because i cannot handle up and down st. and walking with two grocery things that are heavy. the reason that i have to do this is that a few people want to release us from being -- i'm sorry, i've lost a lot of my vocabulary. we are surrounded by people who have parking permits, and certain persons, not too many, do not want it because it is too
expensive, and they do not like it. i moved into that house and build it with my husband in 1963, and in 1963, i could manage all of this. including little children. but i cannot do it anymore, and i do not want to have to move. it would be a very, very, very expensive thing to do, and i cannot do that. if we want to have a battle about who's going to have to spend more money about this, i think i would win. thank you very much. i'm not angry about anybody. it is a thing that happens. but if you are surrounded by people who have an advantage that you do not, you cannot pay.
>> [reading names] director nolan: good afternoon. >> hi, there. i reside at 3649 20 first-rate. i have lived there since 1964. in recent years, i have noticed parking has become very difficult on our block. my assumption is it is the case of all the other streets surrounding our neighborhood already have bigger parking, so what has happened is that we have become one of the straits that is known as a street where you can leave your car and yourbart or muni and even though the airport. often, we see streets left on the street for two or three weeks before they disappear. one thing -- one that never
wanted to mention is we live on a very treacherous street, one of the steepest in san francisco. if you have to park of hill, there are some very large pine trees that drop needles year round, especially in the winter when the storms come in. if you have to actually walk down the sidewalk, on these high needles, it is very slippery. not to mention that on the southern side of the street, there is a lot of moss that gross -- grows. the shorter the trip you can make from your car to your staircase, the better off you are, so it really is a matter of safety. i love my location. i am a native. i work hard to buy a house on this hill. i do park on the street. i parked their daily. i'm really hoping that things change. thank you very much. >> [reading names]
>> good afternoon. i also live on 21st street. i have been there 20 years, and i noticed it has become progressively more difficult to park, and i believe that is because we are completely surrounded by permit parking blocks. i have a two-year-old, and it has become impossible to the point that i'm really considering moving because i do because i don't have a driveway. if i leave the house, i have groceries and there is nowhere for me to park. if i have to park at the top of the street, i have to move my car every two hours. it has become almost impossible. i love the block. it is hard when your see people dropping their cars. they will take everything out and sometimes for weeks unless
somebody calls them in. the 72-hour law is not really effective because i wait 72 hours, and it generally waits before telling. another car comes and replaces it. i don't want special treatment, i just want to have a permit. >> those are the less of the speaker cards regarding this item. >> i would just emphasize -- i have in a resident since 1988. there was no parking problem until the city started permitting around the area. as many as 14 days, the
situation became seriously problematic. i have a 2-year-old son. it is a treacherous hill. they use it for training. that gives you a sense of dusty the hill must be. the other problem we have seen is that the safety of the streak has changed. if you go up to sanchez st., you'll find a block that is now the void of cars because it has become a permitted street. yesterday, we had problems with car alarms on cars that were parked for days or weeks at that time.
and this is a very serious problem, i can't urge strongly enough for you to approve a permit parking. >> i am here to address a permit parkinwhat you have just heard e first time i have heard support of a number. i main question is, how many people support this? i have two dozen people that have signed against it. i believe two dozen is more than a few.